I am a biology student with major interest in neuroscience and molecular biology. It's my first year at university.

What should I do if I want to be a reliable researcher in biological sciences, especially in neuroscience?

  • 5
    "Some extra tips" is too broad and opinion based. See academia.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask especially You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page. Your questions should be reasonably scoped. If you can imagine an entire book that answers your question, you’re asking too much. – Bryan Krause Jun 22 '18 at 21:58
  • 1
    You're in the first year - I wouldn't bet donuts to dollars that in ~10 years you'll be working in the same field (I changed mine half-way through my PhD). Nevertheless, your attitude towards doing research as early as possible is admirable. You might approach a researcher from your institute and ask him straightforwardly to work with him. But be smart: it would be best to make some connection first. E.g., if he's a lecturer you had classes with, perform well. If not, try learning about his work, read his papers, go to him once-twice to ask questions and discuss, and then ask to join his team. – user68958 Jun 22 '18 at 22:05
  • 1
    Keeping your data organized and reachable for others sounds like a good idea that is applicable across the fields. – Oleg Lobachev Jun 22 '18 at 22:27
  • Moderator’s notice: Please only edit this question if you attempt to make it reopenable. This particular means narrowing down the scope of the question, e.g., by focusing on a particular part of the scientific workflow. Adding evidence that the problem in question exists does not make the question less broad. However, neither does removing it. I’ll leave the question at the version without the quote because it is just a dump from Wikipedia without reference. This does not mean that adding the quote (in a proper way) would be a problem, but it does not make the question reopenable. – Wrzlprmft Jun 23 '18 at 12:59

If you mean how do I conduct reliable, high quality work? my advice is to always let the data do the speaking. In this publish or perish atmosphere, along with biases of colleagues and mentors, it is easy to begin to interpret data in ways not totally objective. I’ve always tried to step back and as best I can, ask myself ‘what is the data really trying to say?’

If you mean how can I be an outstanding, promising scientist I’d say do the above, but also be present and visible. Go to talks and functions, speak with other students and PIs, and be a good departmental citizen.

| improve this answer | |

being reliable can means two things in scientific context.

  1. standard and quality of research on highest grounds. Unfortunately, molecular biology and neuroscience have a lowest reproducibility rate. there is a lack of understanding of processes and chemistry of reactions. Research is conducted in such a complex setting in terms of quality control and assurance. You will need to find collaborators and get good theoretical background also follow HEITZ advice!

  2. understand publish and perish culture and don't overthink too much about the topic and scope, as a young and future researcher, don't get caught by the prestige of lab and researcher/PI reputation. As matter of fact, highly prestigious labs push the students to explore most of the time dead ends field. Most of their graduate student will not have a good basis for organizing independent research when they finish PhD, and would rather continue to several postdocs. Build independence, but not working independence, rather intellectual one!

| improve this answer | |

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.